What if Israel Annexes the West Bank and Lets Palestinians Vote

[Coyote]

rylah

You ask: “what should the obligations of Israeli citizenship be” and that is a good question.

I would say it includes following the laws of the state, participating in civil society and the political process, participating in defense. Not engaging in treason or sedition.

So how this declaration should be documented?

Following the laws (civil and criminal) is easily documented, if laws are broken, the person is subject to the legal process.

To some degree treason and sedition is the same.

Are obligations mandatory or encouraged as part of good citizenry?

if mandatory, required military (or equivalent) serve is easily documented. Voting can be as well.

 

[Coyote]

rylah

Is this a reasonable definition of the term? If so how exactly would it relate to Israel today and the citizenship of non-Jews in Israel now and if Israel annexes territory?

Ger toshav - Wikipedia

I am going to add this because there is a strong similarity to the Muslim dhimmi and the Jewish Ger Toshav, in my opinion, and I predict an explosion, in part because I don’t think Dhimmi status, as was originally formulated is well understood either.

The Dhimmi and the Ger Toshav | Judaism and Islam – comparing the similarities between Judaism and Islam

Both would seem to be a means of offering some protections and status in a world where a secular concept of human rights did not exist, in fact the idea of a secular government did not exist and religious minorities were often persecuted. Neither, in my view, is applicable to a modern state or modern concepts of citizenship.

 

[rylah]

Um. You DID see Sunni Man say on another thread just today that Jews remaining in Palestine will be restricted from certain professions, will be prevented from military service and will have to pay a dhimmi tax, didn't you? What makes you think the "historical context" is historical and not current context?

The historical context of "they didn't fight that much" is that the Jewish people were properly oppressed and generally didn't do outrageous things like, oh, I don't know....pray at their own holy places or fail to pay their special "protection" taxes.

No, I didn't. But, I will say this about Sunni Man - he is a hardcore chain yanker and troller at times, it's hard to know what he really thinks. What he is saying is not too much different than Rylah's idea of a "guest status" for non Jewish citizens of Israel. Would be interesting to get Sunni Man in a serious conversation some day and pin him down but don't see that happening.

Historical context matters. And it is not the same as modern context. For one - the entire idea of "human rights" is a relatively modern concept.

Why do you keep attaching to me this "guest status"?
Each time you bring this up I correct you, but you insist on repeating this.

Ger Toshav, though you try to distort it, is not a 'guest status', and it's not my idea,
rather a Halachic term for the non-Jewish citizens of Israel.

Torah prescribes for all non-Jews who want to live in the land to

• Recognize the G-d of Israel,
• Recognize the Torah of Moses
• Follow the 7 Laws of Noah
• Submit to Israel's sovereignty

1-3 are fulfilled, we're at stage 4.
We only need some reformation on stage 2, but it's all pretty much about stage 4.
This is what this whole conversation is about, and for the last 71 years.

You keep talking about guests, I'm repeating citizens with civil obligation.
So, at this stage, I raise the same question you have been evading for months now -

What should be the obligations upon receiving Israeli citizenship?

Why should non Jews be required to recognized the God of Israel? Or the Torah? Or religious law?

Because that's the prescription for enjoying the full blessing of this land.

All non-Jewish citizens, even those who might identify as atheists are in the category of Ger Toshav,
this is how the Rabbinate was set by Maran Avraham Yitzhak Cohen Ztz"l.

How does that effect citizenship and rights?

How does a Halachic term for non-Jewish citizenship effect rights?
I don't know...you don't get be a hazan at my shul.

 

[Coyote]

No, I didn't. But, I will say this about Sunni Man - he is a hardcore chain yanker and troller at times, it's hard to know what he really thinks. What he is saying is not too much different than Rylah's idea of a "guest status" for non Jewish citizens of Israel. Would be interesting to get Sunni Man in a serious conversation some day and pin him down but don't see that happening.

Historical context matters. And it is not the same as modern context. For one - the entire idea of "human rights" is a relatively modern concept.

Why do you keep attaching to me this "guest status"?
Each time you bring this up I correct you, but you insist on repeating this.

Ger Toshav, though you try to distort it, is not a 'guest status', and it's not my idea,
rather a Halachic term for the non-Jewish citizens of Israel.

Torah prescribes for all non-Jews who want to live in the land to

• Recognize the G-d of Israel,
• Recognize the Torah of Moses
• Follow the 7 Laws of Noah
• Submit to Israel's sovereignty

1-3 are fulfilled, we're at stage 4.
We only need some reformation on stage 2, but it's all pretty much about stage 4.
This is what this whole conversation is about, and for the last 71 years.

You keep talking about guests, I'm repeating citizens with civil obligation.
So, at this stage, I raise the same question you have been evading for months now -

What should be the obligations upon receiving Israeli citizenship?

Why should non Jews be required to recognized the God of Israel? Or the Torah? Or religious law?

Because that's the prescription for enjoying the full blessing of this land.

All non-Jewish citizens, even those who might identify as atheists are in the category of Ger Toshav,
this is how the Rabbinate was set by Maran Avraham Yitzhak Cohen Ztz"l.

How does that effect citizenship and rights?

How does a Halachic term for non-Jewish citizenship effect rights?
I don't know...you don't get be a hazan at my shul.

And I don’t know what you mean.

 

[Shusha]

Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.

(and no it is NOT the same thing as dhimmi)

 

[rylah]

rylah

Is this a reasonable definition of the term? If so how exactly would it relate to Israel today and the citizenship of non-Jews in Israel now and if Israel annexes territory?

Ger toshav - Wikipedia

I am going to add this because there is a strong similarity to the Muslim dhimmi and the Jewish Ger Toshav, in my opinion, and I predict an explosion, in part because I don’t think Dhimmi status, as was originally formulated is well understood either.

The Dhimmi and the Ger Toshav | Judaism and Islam – comparing the similarities between Judaism and Islam

Both would seem to be a means of offering some protections and status in a world where a secular concept of human rights did not exist, in fact the idea of a secular government did not exist and religious minorities were often persecuted. Neither, in my view, is applicable to a modern state or modern concepts of citizenship.

Full stop.
Ger Toshav is a civil status of the non-Jewish citizens of Israel.
Dhimmitude is a communal religious status of permanent subjugation and servitude for no-citizens.

Dhimmi is nothing like the privilege of being a citizen of the 11th most happy country in the world, that's called Ger Toshav.

 

[Coyote]

Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.

(and no it is NOT the same thing as dhimmi)

Read the link, it is informative. What specifically is significantly different? I don’t mean in how it has been applied or abused over the ages but rather in it’s original intent?

 

[Coyote]

rylah

Is this a reasonable definition of the term? If so how exactly would it relate to Israel today and the citizenship of non-Jews in Israel now and if Israel annexes territory?

Ger toshav - Wikipedia

I am going to add this because there is a strong similarity to the Muslim dhimmi and the Jewish Ger Toshav, in my opinion, and I predict an explosion, in part because I don’t think Dhimmi status, as was originally formulated is well understood either.

The Dhimmi and the Ger Toshav | Judaism and Islam – comparing the similarities between Judaism and Islam

Both would seem to be a means of offering some protections and status in a world where a secular concept of human rights did not exist, in fact the idea of a secular government did not exist and religious minorities were often persecuted. Neither, in my view, is applicable to a modern state or modern concepts of citizenship.

Full stop.
Ger Toshav is a civil status of the non-Jewish citizens of Israel.
Dhimmitude is a communal religious status of permanent subjugation and servitude for no-citizens.

Dhimmi is nothing like the privilege of being a citizen of the 11th most happy country in the world, that's called Ger Toshav.

Originally, you seemed to be saying that it was a status where the person could be expelled while a Jewish citizen would not be. You seemed to be expressing the different types of citizenship as desirable. I don’t recall the thread. Is that what you you were expressing? If not, then I misunderstood. If so, then I think my question about how it would relate to modern concepts of nationhood and citizenship is perfectly relevant since annexing involves questions about citizenship.

 

[rylah]

Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.

(and no it is NOT the same thing as dhimmi)

Read the link, it is informative. What specifically is significantly different? I don’t mean in how it has been applied or abused over the ages but rather in it’s original intent?

Under the Dhimmi status Jews had to wear their shoes off when getting out of the Mlah (Ghetto), couldn't ride horses, had to build lower than Muslims, pay skull tax in humiliation, convert daughters upon father's death and give them away to foster families...

Just to name a few.

You're doing great injustice, and insulting everyone's intelligence comparing this to Israeli citizenship.

 

[Hollie]

Jews and Arabs will be fighting until the end of time. There can be no compromise. One will have to take over the other.

They didn't fight that much prior to Israel being created - why wouldn't they stop again?

Actually, they did.

Not as much, or I should say no more than others around them - there were long periods of relative peace, stability, prosperity.

It’s important to note that “periods of periods of relative peace, stability, prosperity” were conditioned under the Islamic imposition of the dhimmi status for Jews and Christians and the exclusion of Jews from post-colonial Pan Arab nationalism of the late 19th and 20th centuries. At no time ii islamist history have the dhimmi been considered as anythijng but second-class citizens in islamist society with limited rights and privileges expressly targeted at the dhimmi. The history of Arab/Moslem behavior toward Jews (and Christians( is quite clear. We have 1400 years of Arab/Moslem and Jewish relationships to which we can refer. The conflicts that arose from the influx of Western/European ideologies in the 18th and 19th centuries in the final century of the Ottoman Empire, including "equal rights" and equal dignity, the joint rise of Arab nationalism and Zionism, and the world tragedy of WWII were, (and still are). Unthinkable to the islamist psyche.


As to the notion of a one state solution (Israel + West Bank). That seems absurd. Maybe it’s just me but I don’t believe this years graduating class of the Nazi inspired Hamas youth camps are really motivated toward such concepts as representative rule, democratic principles or rule of law. Those who envison Pan-Arab nationalism, or re-establishment of the Caliphate, or religiously seek the world united (politically and theologically) under Islam have an agenda that is contrary to Israeli citizenship. Somrthing like the Hamas Charter as an example.


When Israel declared its independence on May 14, 1948...as the armies of 5 Arab nations (Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Iraq) prepared to "drive the Jews into the Sea", the Israel Declaration was a call from the Jews to their Arab neighbors, both in Israel and beside her:

In the very midst of the onslaught launched against us now for months — to the Arab inhabitants of the State of Israel to preserve peace and participate in the upbuilding of the State on the basis of full and equal citizenship and due representation in all its provisional and permanent institutions. We extend our hand to all neighbouring states and their peoples in an offer of peace and good neighbourliness, and appeal to them to establish bonds of cooperation and mutual help with the sovereign Jewish people settled in its own land. The State of Israel is prepared to do its share in a common effort for the advancement of the entire Middle East.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace Pro...claration of Establishment of State of Israel


The above speaks to a different aganfa than does Islamic gee-had and the Hamas Charter.


Further, I see nothing to indicate that Arabs-Moslems in the West Bank would accept the responsibilities of representative type democracy. On a daily basis, the PA criminalizes Israel's existence, distorts its motives and maligns its character, its birth, even its conception. These are folks who still worship Arafat and it’s difficult to forget the Black September episode.

 

[rylah]

rylah

Is this a reasonable definition of the term? If so how exactly would it relate to Israel today and the citizenship of non-Jews in Israel now and if Israel annexes territory?

Ger toshav - Wikipedia

I am going to add this because there is a strong similarity to the Muslim dhimmi and the Jewish Ger Toshav, in my opinion, and I predict an explosion, in part because I don’t think Dhimmi status, as was originally formulated is well understood either.

The Dhimmi and the Ger Toshav | Judaism and Islam – comparing the similarities between Judaism and Islam

Both would seem to be a means of offering some protections and status in a world where a secular concept of human rights did not exist, in fact the idea of a secular government did not exist and religious minorities were often persecuted. Neither, in my view, is applicable to a modern state or modern concepts of citizenship.

Full stop.
Ger Toshav is a civil status of the non-Jewish citizens of Israel.
Dhimmitude is a communal religious status of permanent subjugation and servitude for no-citizens.

Dhimmi is nothing like the privilege of being a citizen of the 11th most happy country in the world, that's called Ger Toshav.

Originally, you seemed to be saying that it was a status where the person could be expelled while a Jewish citizen would not be. You seemed to be expressing the different types of citizenship as desirable. I don’t recall the thread. Is that what you you were expressing? If not, then I misunderstood. If so, then I think my question about how it would relate to modern concepts of nationhood and citizenship is perfectly relevant since annexing involves questions about citizenship.

What a mess.

Yes, you're totally misrepresenting what I said.
I, and not only, already explained several times how this applies to common terms.

How else do you want me to explain what CITIZENSHIP means?
Look at judge Salim Joubran, he's a Ger Toshav, a non-Jewish citizen of Israel.

 

[Shusha]

Ger Toshav doesn't mean anything other than a citizen of Israel for all non-religious purposes. Let's not get our panties in a wad here.

(and no it is NOT the same thing as dhimmi)

Read the link, it is informative. What specifically is significantly different? I don’t mean in how it has been applied or abused over the ages but rather in it’s original intent?

I read the link. Its a weak attempt to create equivalence where there is none. There is no hidden meaning behind rylah 's use of the Hebrew term for "citizen" rather than the English term for "citizen". It just means citizen.

 

[Shusha]

The thing is, according to Israel's basic law, second class citizenship it's going to be.

A two-state solution is increasingly unlikely because of Israeli settlements on occupied territory, and the ramped up demolition of Palestinian homes and infrastructure to make more room for more Israeli settlements.

These two comments are simply false.

There is nothing in Israel's laws which make Arabs "second class citizens". Nor does Israel ever demolish Arab Palestinian homes or infrastructure and replace them with Jewish Israeli homes.

There is PLENTY to criticize Israel for. Why do people continue to post blatant lies? Oh. It would be because if they told the truth about Israel, it would be obvious that Israel, for all its faults, is actually one of the better States in the world as far as how it treats its citizens.

 

[rylah]

Why not?

A two state solution, as originally envisioned, is in a zombie state of perpetual propping up by diplomats. It's support has drastically waned among both Palestinians and Israelis.

With a one state solution (Israel + West Bank) - assuming a scenario where ALL residents are offered the opportunity of citizenship up front, the plus side for Palestinians would be the potential of better representation, political stability, assumption of rights guaranteed by citizenship and funding for infrastructure, education, etc. that is in perpetual shortage with their Palestinian leadership.


Here's what happens if Israel annexes the West Bank and lets Palestinians vote

Would the Arabs on the West Bank like singing Hatikvah (the most beautiful national anthem in the world, both in terms of lyrics and melody)? Would they salute the Israeli flag, with its Star of David? Would they take pride in seeing a Menorah in front of the Knesset, Israel's Parliament? Would they accept the fact that only Hebrew is their national language, now that Arabic has been demoted from that position? Even Mohammed Zoabi, an Arab Israeli Zionist, opposed the Nation-State Law. The answer to all these questions is No. Therefore, even though it's tough for Jews to to give up Judea (their ancestral, historical and Biblical heartland) to those savage Arabs, I see no other way than 2 states.

I don't understand how their "not feeling proud" of the Star of David,
suggests giving them Judea...

What's next, Tel-Aviv because there's alcohol in the bars?
Shorts my circuit.

 

[Shusha]

The situation on the ground has changed.

I am morally against it. But if terrorist acts - and I mean ACTS are performed (as defined by life threatening acts against people because of their ethnic identity) then sure - expel THAT person - not the family, not the tribe, not anyone else. Or - put them through the criminal justice system. Actually that might be better.

But it has to be applied equally - that means Jews committing acts of violence against Palestinians should get the same treatment.

What I'm afraid of though is that this will be abused and used as a reason for mass expulsions much the way demoliting the family homes of Palestinians is abused as a group punishment.

How can such abuse be prevented?

So, here's the thing. Such "abuse" can be prevented by Arabs refraining from being hostile and committing acts of terrorism. Full stop.

In a one state solution, Israel will have a significant minority of Arab citizens who are hostile to Israel and to Israel's Jewish citizens. Any hostilities, overt, covert, incitement, actual acts of harm or terrorism are the responsibility of those committing the violations. Full stop.

The question being asked here is not, "How can we prevent Israel from abusing Arabs?" The question is, "In the face of a hostile and violent minority population, how should Israel respond to acts of violence, threats of violence and a culture of violence and hostility?"

Is the answer expulsion? Its a bigger question than just "what to do with individuals who commit acts of terror". Its a question of managing that hostile culture.

 

[Shusha]

Disagree....because some of the problems are coming from Israel's own policies which are causing the demise of a two-state opportunity.

The only reason the two-state solution is dead is because Arabs refuse to entertain the possibility.

 

[flacaltenn]

Could annexation and one state work? (Just talking about Area C, not the rest of the WB or Gaza)

It is illegal to annex occupied territory.

Was it then an illegal Jordanian occupation of the West Bank for about 15 years before the 67 war? And WhereTF were you when you LEARNED that Jordan was "occupying" it.???


Diff is that majority of Palis APPROVED of Jordan's annex.. Got $$Bills in infrastructure and political control of the WB cities... But Yasser Arafat screwed that relationship by starting a literary invasion of the Kings capitol and got his ass KICKED out of there..

 

[Shusha]

Why should non Jews be required to recognized the God of Israel? Or the Torah? Or religious law?

I think there is a misunderstanding here. I think this type of misunderstanding is common because people tend to see Judaism through Xtian- or Muslim-colored glasses.

When rylah says:

Torah prescribes for all non-Jews who want to live in the land to

• Recognize the G-d of Israel,
• Recognize the Torah of Moses
• Follow the 7 Laws of Noah
• Submit to Israel's sovereignty

1-3 are fulfilled, we're at stage 4.

notice he says that #1, 2 and 3 are ALREADY fulfilled.

This concept is not meant to be understood as a requirement for each individual citizen of Israel, nor a restriction on individual citizens.

Its an understanding that the nations, generally, have accepted monotheism and a very basic set of moral values. Don't take it to mean that all non-Jewish citizens will be required to do anything or that they will discriminated against. It doesn't mean that at all.

 

[flacaltenn]

The thing is, according to Israel's basic law, second class citizenship it's going to be. That has nothing to do with whether or not Israel is "established", one way or another. It's a result of the prevailing lack of respect for non-Jews and international law.

Garbage... This is NOT a religious tolerance issue (except among Arabs) and the Arab citizens of Israel NOW with 13 seats in the Knesset have full rights.. There may BE some Arab (not Muslim) bias going on among some Israelis, but what tolerant advanced country doesn't have a few buttheads????

And even tho the Arabs are exempt from mandatory national service, they STILL volunteer in areas CRITICAL to IDF and other security areas.

 

[flacaltenn]

Yes it would....maybe semi-autonomy for some areas within an Israeli nation?

Actually fairly COMPLETE autonomy for the City Centers (or states).. Their own laws, own security, own zoning, own taxation, own determination of who speaks for them... This OF COURSE means that have to also have to establish TRADE and routes of commerce and freedom to buy and selll with ANYONE -- not just Israel.. That's why my "Palestine Trade Route" paper INCLUDES these cities at the center of a MAJOR regional transit system..

And there CAN BE a "federation" of all these City Centers (states) that cooperate on regional planning and negotiating with Israel on trade regulations and such...

A lot of Palestinians are agrarian, farmers....how would they fit in to this model?

Farmers are pretty flexible.. They need access to trade routes, water, power and NOT A LOT of "regulation"
or govt.. And if Israel recognizes their property claims and gives them access to the Israeli legal system for disputes, farmers would be just peachy.. More complicated companies and businesses would have more issues being bound by Israeli policies..

I think the main areas along the upper Jordan border would too important to defending BOTH Israel and the "Pali Federation" to NOT annex..But that would not strip out that much of the fertile ground..